Loading…

What limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species after their reintroduction: quality or spatial arrangement of habitat

Population growth and spread of recently reintroduced species is crucial for the success of their reintroduction. We analysed what limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species Maculinea teleius and Maculinea nausithous, over 10 years following their reintroduction. During this time, their d...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Animal conservation 2009-12, Vol.12 (6), p.540-548
Main Authors: van Langevelde, F, Wynhoff, I
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4581-7c0fc385e78c5eac64acfe49e1d8268bee20eceb5639989b30a12e937149b8c13
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4581-7c0fc385e78c5eac64acfe49e1d8268bee20eceb5639989b30a12e937149b8c13
container_end_page 548
container_issue 6
container_start_page 540
container_title Animal conservation
container_volume 12
creator van Langevelde, F
Wynhoff, I
description Population growth and spread of recently reintroduced species is crucial for the success of their reintroduction. We analysed what limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species Maculinea teleius and Maculinea nausithous, over 10 years following their reintroduction. During this time, their distributions appeared to be limited to a few sites although it was thought that more suitable habitats were available. Thus, we question, does the quality or the spatial arrangement of their habitat limit their spread? Although adult individuals of both species can select high-quality plots, we show that selection of suitable plots in the area of reintroduction is spatially constrained. A low colonization probability of unoccupied distant plots of high quality was found for both species. The abandonment of occupied plots in Ma. teleius was also found to be dependent on the distance to occupied plots. We conclude that the spatial distribution of the two species during the 10 years following reintroduction was limited by the spatial arrangement of their habitat, rather than by the availability of high-quality plots. The spatial constraints in movement can explain observed source-sink structures when female butterflies deposit their eggs on low-quality plots. We conclude that although these species have very similar life histories, they require different approaches to their conservation due to subtle differences in adult habitat use and movement. Conservation of Ma. teleius should concentrate on improving local habitat quality, whereas conservation of Ma. nausithous is predicted to be more effective by creating a spatial network of suitable habitat plots, such as along road verges.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1469-1795.2009.00281.x
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_wagen</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_wageningen_narcis_oai_library_wur_nl_wurpubs_384577</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1328521452</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4581-7c0fc385e78c5eac64acfe49e1d8268bee20eceb5639989b30a12e937149b8c13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUFv1DAQhSMEEqXwG_CRSxY7jmOn4lIVKIgKkKC0t9HEO-l6ycZb29Hu3vjpOGzVM77MyH7f04xfUTDBFyKft-uFqJu2FLpVi4rzdsF5ZcRi_6Q4eXx4mnvZ6LKtJX9evIhxzbmojBQnxZ-bFSY2uI1LkaUVsbgNhEvme5Z2nlk_3tFIwVnWTSlR6IdDlpB1FBn2-WKGXGCB3JiCX042OT-esfsJB5cOzIcsx-RwYBgCZrcNjWm2X2HnEqaXxbMeh0ivHuppcf3xw8-LT-XVt8vPF-dXpa2VEaW2vLfSKNLGKkLb1Gh7qlsSS1M1piOqOFnqVCPb1rSd5CgqaqUWddsZK-RpcXb03WHeyM1rwYjBuggeHQyuCxgOsJsCjMNctlMXQZpaaZ3hN0d4G_z9RDHBxkVLw4Aj-SmCkJVRlahVlaXmKLXBxxioh21wm9lacJgTgzXMwcAcDMyJwb_EYJ_Rdw8juoEO_83B-cWv3GS8POIuJto_4hh-Q6OlVnDz9RLqL5rfvr_l8D3rXx_1PXrAu5B_4vpHxYXkQnMllJJ_AfskuU0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1328521452</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>What limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species after their reintroduction: quality or spatial arrangement of habitat</title><source>Wiley</source><creator>van Langevelde, F ; Wynhoff, I</creator><creatorcontrib>van Langevelde, F ; Wynhoff, I</creatorcontrib><description>Population growth and spread of recently reintroduced species is crucial for the success of their reintroduction. We analysed what limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species Maculinea teleius and Maculinea nausithous, over 10 years following their reintroduction. During this time, their distributions appeared to be limited to a few sites although it was thought that more suitable habitats were available. Thus, we question, does the quality or the spatial arrangement of their habitat limit their spread? Although adult individuals of both species can select high-quality plots, we show that selection of suitable plots in the area of reintroduction is spatially constrained. A low colonization probability of unoccupied distant plots of high quality was found for both species. The abandonment of occupied plots in Ma. teleius was also found to be dependent on the distance to occupied plots. We conclude that the spatial distribution of the two species during the 10 years following reintroduction was limited by the spatial arrangement of their habitat, rather than by the availability of high-quality plots. The spatial constraints in movement can explain observed source-sink structures when female butterflies deposit their eggs on low-quality plots. We conclude that although these species have very similar life histories, they require different approaches to their conservation due to subtle differences in adult habitat use and movement. Conservation of Ma. teleius should concentrate on improving local habitat quality, whereas conservation of Ma. nausithous is predicted to be more effective by creating a spatial network of suitable habitat plots, such as along road verges.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1367-9430</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-1795</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-1795.2009.00281.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>colonization ; connectivity ; conservation ; dispersal ; ellenberg indicator values ; expansion-retraction ; habitat management ; habitat quality ; large blue ; Maculinea nausithous ; Maculinea teleius ; metapopulation ; population ; reintroduction ; scale</subject><ispartof>Animal conservation, 2009-12, Vol.12 (6), p.540-548</ispartof><rights>2009 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2009 The Zoological Society of London</rights><rights>Wageningen University &amp; Research</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4581-7c0fc385e78c5eac64acfe49e1d8268bee20eceb5639989b30a12e937149b8c13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4581-7c0fc385e78c5eac64acfe49e1d8268bee20eceb5639989b30a12e937149b8c13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>van Langevelde, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wynhoff, I</creatorcontrib><title>What limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species after their reintroduction: quality or spatial arrangement of habitat</title><title>Animal conservation</title><description>Population growth and spread of recently reintroduced species is crucial for the success of their reintroduction. We analysed what limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species Maculinea teleius and Maculinea nausithous, over 10 years following their reintroduction. During this time, their distributions appeared to be limited to a few sites although it was thought that more suitable habitats were available. Thus, we question, does the quality or the spatial arrangement of their habitat limit their spread? Although adult individuals of both species can select high-quality plots, we show that selection of suitable plots in the area of reintroduction is spatially constrained. A low colonization probability of unoccupied distant plots of high quality was found for both species. The abandonment of occupied plots in Ma. teleius was also found to be dependent on the distance to occupied plots. We conclude that the spatial distribution of the two species during the 10 years following reintroduction was limited by the spatial arrangement of their habitat, rather than by the availability of high-quality plots. The spatial constraints in movement can explain observed source-sink structures when female butterflies deposit their eggs on low-quality plots. We conclude that although these species have very similar life histories, they require different approaches to their conservation due to subtle differences in adult habitat use and movement. Conservation of Ma. teleius should concentrate on improving local habitat quality, whereas conservation of Ma. nausithous is predicted to be more effective by creating a spatial network of suitable habitat plots, such as along road verges.</description><subject>colonization</subject><subject>connectivity</subject><subject>conservation</subject><subject>dispersal</subject><subject>ellenberg indicator values</subject><subject>expansion-retraction</subject><subject>habitat management</subject><subject>habitat quality</subject><subject>large blue</subject><subject>Maculinea nausithous</subject><subject>Maculinea teleius</subject><subject>metapopulation</subject><subject>population</subject><subject>reintroduction</subject><subject>scale</subject><issn>1367-9430</issn><issn>1469-1795</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkUFv1DAQhSMEEqXwG_CRSxY7jmOn4lIVKIgKkKC0t9HEO-l6ycZb29Hu3vjpOGzVM77MyH7f04xfUTDBFyKft-uFqJu2FLpVi4rzdsF5ZcRi_6Q4eXx4mnvZ6LKtJX9evIhxzbmojBQnxZ-bFSY2uI1LkaUVsbgNhEvme5Z2nlk_3tFIwVnWTSlR6IdDlpB1FBn2-WKGXGCB3JiCX042OT-esfsJB5cOzIcsx-RwYBgCZrcNjWm2X2HnEqaXxbMeh0ivHuppcf3xw8-LT-XVt8vPF-dXpa2VEaW2vLfSKNLGKkLb1Gh7qlsSS1M1piOqOFnqVCPb1rSd5CgqaqUWddsZK-RpcXb03WHeyM1rwYjBuggeHQyuCxgOsJsCjMNctlMXQZpaaZ3hN0d4G_z9RDHBxkVLw4Aj-SmCkJVRlahVlaXmKLXBxxioh21wm9lacJgTgzXMwcAcDMyJwb_EYJ_Rdw8juoEO_83B-cWv3GS8POIuJto_4hh-Q6OlVnDz9RLqL5rfvr_l8D3rXx_1PXrAu5B_4vpHxYXkQnMllJJ_AfskuU0</recordid><startdate>200912</startdate><enddate>200912</enddate><creator>van Langevelde, F</creator><creator>Wynhoff, I</creator><general>Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>QVL</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200912</creationdate><title>What limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species after their reintroduction: quality or spatial arrangement of habitat</title><author>van Langevelde, F ; Wynhoff, I</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4581-7c0fc385e78c5eac64acfe49e1d8268bee20eceb5639989b30a12e937149b8c13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>colonization</topic><topic>connectivity</topic><topic>conservation</topic><topic>dispersal</topic><topic>ellenberg indicator values</topic><topic>expansion-retraction</topic><topic>habitat management</topic><topic>habitat quality</topic><topic>large blue</topic><topic>Maculinea nausithous</topic><topic>Maculinea teleius</topic><topic>metapopulation</topic><topic>population</topic><topic>reintroduction</topic><topic>scale</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>van Langevelde, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wynhoff, I</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>NARCIS:Publications</collection><jtitle>Animal conservation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>van Langevelde, F</au><au>Wynhoff, I</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>What limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species after their reintroduction: quality or spatial arrangement of habitat</atitle><jtitle>Animal conservation</jtitle><date>2009-12</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>540</spage><epage>548</epage><pages>540-548</pages><issn>1367-9430</issn><eissn>1469-1795</eissn><abstract>Population growth and spread of recently reintroduced species is crucial for the success of their reintroduction. We analysed what limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species Maculinea teleius and Maculinea nausithous, over 10 years following their reintroduction. During this time, their distributions appeared to be limited to a few sites although it was thought that more suitable habitats were available. Thus, we question, does the quality or the spatial arrangement of their habitat limit their spread? Although adult individuals of both species can select high-quality plots, we show that selection of suitable plots in the area of reintroduction is spatially constrained. A low colonization probability of unoccupied distant plots of high quality was found for both species. The abandonment of occupied plots in Ma. teleius was also found to be dependent on the distance to occupied plots. We conclude that the spatial distribution of the two species during the 10 years following reintroduction was limited by the spatial arrangement of their habitat, rather than by the availability of high-quality plots. The spatial constraints in movement can explain observed source-sink structures when female butterflies deposit their eggs on low-quality plots. We conclude that although these species have very similar life histories, they require different approaches to their conservation due to subtle differences in adult habitat use and movement. Conservation of Ma. teleius should concentrate on improving local habitat quality, whereas conservation of Ma. nausithous is predicted to be more effective by creating a spatial network of suitable habitat plots, such as along road verges.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1469-1795.2009.00281.x</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1367-9430
ispartof Animal conservation, 2009-12, Vol.12 (6), p.540-548
issn 1367-9430
1469-1795
language eng
recordid cdi_wageningen_narcis_oai_library_wur_nl_wurpubs_384577
source Wiley
subjects colonization
connectivity
conservation
dispersal
ellenberg indicator values
expansion-retraction
habitat management
habitat quality
large blue
Maculinea nausithous
Maculinea teleius
metapopulation
population
reintroduction
scale
title What limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species after their reintroduction: quality or spatial arrangement of habitat
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T14%3A37%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_wagen&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=What%20limits%20the%20spread%20of%20two%20congeneric%20butterfly%20species%20after%20their%20reintroduction:%20quality%20or%20spatial%20arrangement%20of%20habitat&rft.jtitle=Animal%20conservation&rft.au=van%20Langevelde,%20F&rft.date=2009-12&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=540&rft.epage=548&rft.pages=540-548&rft.issn=1367-9430&rft.eissn=1469-1795&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2009.00281.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_wagen%3E1328521452%3C/proquest_wagen%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4581-7c0fc385e78c5eac64acfe49e1d8268bee20eceb5639989b30a12e937149b8c13%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1328521452&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true